Re: Bug#510415: tech-ctte: Qmail inclusion (or not) in Debian
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 08:32:11PM +0000, Gerrit Pape wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 08:32:20AM +0000, Gerrit Pape wrote:
> > (3) I was of the opinion that a dependency chain to a packages that
> > provides the newliases program is enough to conform with the Debian
> > policy, and, since Recommends are install by default, recommending the
> > fastforward package is sufficient, while preserving flexibility. I now
> > see that on systems where exim is installed as default MTA, installing
> > the fastforward package will result in a file conflict. The packages
> > should be adapted, so that the qmail-run package provides the newaliases
> > program.
>
> Actually, with the first set of packages uploaded to ftp-master in April
> 2008, the qmail-run package included a minimal newaliases program (doing
> nothing but output a warning). The fastforward package, if installed,
> diverted and replaced the newaliases program with a full functional
> version, giving users the choice. AFAICS this was compliant with our
> policy, but rejected by ftpmasters[*]. I chose to follow ftpmasters'
> suggestion back then.
>
> Would reverting this change concerning newaliases be acceptable for you,
> and solve the newaliases-issue?
>
> [*] http://smarden.org/pape/Debian/1215531259.4854_332.werc
Hi, I'm not sure I'm reading policy correctly. Is it okay to provide
such a newaliases program
#!/bin/sh
cat >&2 <<EOT
qmail on Debian by default doesn't support the /etc/aliases database,
but handles mail aliases differently, please see
http://lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#aliases
EOT
exit 1
which will be diverted and replaced by a fully functional version if the
fastforward package is installed? This way users would be able to
choose which alias mechanism to use easily.
Thanks, Gerrit.
Reply to: